St. Paul daily globe., 1887-04-28
CLEvELAND,s OPINION.
The President Ihinks the Rights of
settlers should Weigh Against
Those of Kailr0ads.

WASHINGTON, April 27.-The president
has sent to the secretary of the interior the
following letter In relation to the contro
versy between Guilford Miller, settler.
and railroad corporation, involving the
question of ownership of certain lands:
ESExecutive Mansion, Washington. April 27.-
Dear Sir: / have examined with much care
and interest the questions involved in the
conflicting claims of Guilford Miller and the
Northern Pacific Railroad company to certain
public lands in Washington Territory The
legal aspects of the case have been examined
and passed upon by several officers of the
government, who do not agree in their con-
clusons. Miller claims to be settler upon
the land in question, whose possession dates
from 1873. He alleges that he has made sub
stantial improvements upon the land and cul,
tivated the same, and it appears that be file6
his claim to the same under the homestead
law on the 2Sth day of December 1884 The
railroad company contends that this land is
within the territory from which it was enti-
tied to select such a quantity of public land
as might be necessary to supply any def
cheney that should be found to exist in the
specified land mentioned in grant by the
government TO said company i'm aid of the
construction of the road, such deficiency
being contemplated as likely to arise from
THE PARAMOUNT RIGHT
OF private purchase, and settlers within the
territory embracing SAID granted lands, and
that the land in dispute was thus selected by
the company on the 10Th day of December,
1888. A large tract, including this land, Was
withdrawn by an order of the interior depart
ment from sale and from pre-emption and
homestead entry in 1879 in anticipation of the
construction of said road and deficiency in
its granted lands. In 1880, upon the filing of
map OF definite location of the road. the
land in controversy, and such which had
been so withdrawn. was found to
lie outside of the limit which
included the granted land; but its withdrawal
aud reservation from settlement and entry
under our land laws was continued upon the
theory that it was within the limits of in
the company, as provided by the law making
the grant. The legal points i'm this contro-
versy turned upon the validity and effect of
the withdrawal and selection of the land and
the continuance thereof. The attorney gem
eral is of the opinion that such withdrawal
and reservation were at all times effectual.
and that they operated to prevent Miller from
acquiring any interest in or right to the land
claimed by him. With this Interpretation of
the law and the former orders and action Of
the interior department, it will be seen that
their effect has been the withdrawal and
reservation since 1872 of thousands, if not
millions of acres of these lands from the
operation of the land laws of the United
States, thus placing them
BEYOND THE REACH
OF our citizens desiring under such laws to
settle and make homes upon the same, and
this has been done for the benefit of a rail-
road company having no fixed, certain or
definite interest in such land. In this man
ner the benef1cent policy and intention of the
government in relation to the public domain